US must convince India to move troops from LoC

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

US advised against dictating terms to Islamabad​

Tuesday, April 28, 2009
WASHINGTON: The US should persuade India to pull back its troops from Kashmir, so that Pakistan could focus more effectively on the fight against violent extremism, a key Republican senator said, as US lawmakers urged Washington against dictating terms to Islamabad.

Appearing on the Fox News channel, Senator Kit Bond, the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, and Democratic Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, favoured the US economic and security assistance for Pakistan, considered by the Obama administration as critical to its anti-terrorism success in Afghanistan.

Bond was asked what the US could do to help Pakistan fight and offset the Taliban influence in some north-western parts of the country. “I visited Pakistan and we looked in great deal into what is going on. Number one, we need to convince India to move its troops off the (Line of Control) in Kashmir, so we, the Pakistani military, under General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, can move them back to fight the terrorists,” Bond said.

“But we need to get the Pakistani troops over there on border with Afghanistan. We can provide them whatever guidance, logistics or intelligence they want,” he added. Bond said President Barack Obama had announced the framework for a policy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, but he had to make it clear that it was going to be a full-fledged counter-insurgency strategy, which led to durable success.

Democratic Senator Levin agreed, saying: “Well, I basically agree with that. Only the Pakistanis can save themselves. They have got to make a decision what kind of country they want. We can be of assistance to them. “We can support them. We can provide intelligence. We can provide other kinds of support, particularly economic support, providing it is going to be effective.”

US advised against dictating terms to Islamabad

-----------------------------------------------------------

Well I have been arguing for such an approach (not to be confused with militarily denuding the LoC) as a means of getting beyond the Indo-Pak impasse and addressing Pakistani concerns for a while now.

It's been discussed before, but might as well throw it out again for comments since some in the US appear to be considering this approach.

 

[jeypore]

No matter how you perceive what India has to do for Pakistan, but the bottom line is pakistan has to decided what it should do for itself.

Democratic Senator Levin agreed, saying: “Only the Pakistanis can save themselves. They have got to make a decision what kind of country they want.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Well I have been arguing for such an approach (not to be confused with militarily denuding the LoC) as a means of getting beyond the Indo-Pak impasse and addressing Pakistani concerns for a while now.

It's been discussed before, but might as well throw it out again for comments since some in the US appear to be considering this approach.

This would be difficult while Jihadis are massed on the Pakistani side of the LoC, straining at the leash to cross over. Just a couple of weeks back there was a huge infiltration of about 50 Jihadis - many of them have been killed and one Pashtun captured, but still some 15 of them on the loose.

Perhaps, if Pakistan makes a gesture of sanity, like quickly hanging or handing over Hafeez Saeed, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi and Zarrar Shah, then that might help to get things moving.

 

[Durran3]

Though i agree with the article that India needs to back of and let Pakistan focus on fighting terrorism, i still take anything on Fox News with a grain of salt. That News network is more an entertainment drama channel than it is a news channel.

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

Absurd suggestion. The guy wants India to act directly against its own interests (esp. in light of massive infiltration in recent months ) so that Pakistan be persuaded to act in its own interests?

 

[sob]

Some gesture is required from our side but looking at the infiltration attempts being made across LOC it will be difficult for the GOI to offer anything.

Plus being an election season with the model code of conduct and the country being run by bureaucrats at this moment, no policy decision is going to be made.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi Agno,

Thankyou very much for that post. India is used to add deceptive issues, fake encounters to bring out its troops on the border to divert pak army's attention away from the north to the south.

It happened right at the climax of the american incursion into afghanistan---when the pak army was ready to chase down the al qaeda---the indians staged a fake encounter at its parliament and ran their forces down to the pakistani border for a war---which ended in a stalemate---eye to eye for over a year.

Pakistani millitary's attention was withdrawn from herding al qaeda to facing india----al qaeda conveniently found safe havens and Bin Laden and Zwaheri disappeared. How convenient for them.

Why would indian army stage a barging in towards the pakistani border right at that critical moment when pak army was about to neutralize al qaeda / defeating al qaeda on the slopes of hindu kush.

Analytically, in such a scenario---india would have lost every initiative that it had taken over pakistan for the last many years---al qaeda gone, Bin Laden Killed as well as Zwaheri---america would be happy----pakistan would be in the good books one more time---more aid---better infra strutucture---more hi-tech and modern weaponery---it all pointed towards a losing preposition for india.

An in-active india would have been the biggest looser out of this game. The indians took out the gamble---staged a fake encounter at its parliament---got the pak army engaged on a different front.

The end results---the paks were taken for fools---they diverted their attention from al qaeda. That is all india wanted---then the next step that india took was to make pakistan a pariah nation---exporter of terrorists----the paks fell into the trap one more time. Now the world started going against them. As they drew their attention away from al qaeda and got entangled in other issues, the web of deception took away the sense of proper reasoning comprehension away from them.

The paks got themselves entangled into every worthless issue that the paks could face except for the real problem that was right in front of their faces.

Pakistan should have rataliated in the world media against india---that india was no friend of the u s a---by marching its forces on the pakistani border---india has hindered in the war against terror on a mega mega scale. Pakistan had al qaeda by the tail---and indian incursion forced them to let go of al qaeda.

The u s lawmaker is right in demanding that indian move its armies back---indian army has no threat from pak army---there is no purpose for the indian army to be at the borders. It serves no purpose other than to be a hinderance against the war on terror.

By its actions of marching onto the pak indian borders in a show of war, india has aided and abbetted the terrorists in gathering momentum and gaining strength.

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

Wow Mastan Khan. Fake encounter at Indian parliament? Nice conspiracy theory to go with my morning coffee.

 

[afriend]

India have got infiltration as issue for keeping more troops at the border..!! But i wonder what is the reason pakistan have got.. since the so called "war cry" of india is non existent in the present day...!! Is it the fear of Indian intrusion or something???? Could any one throw light on to this??? Becuase i have never heard stories of india intruding to pakistani terroritories..!!
But i seriously believe that its just an excuse..!!!

 

[sob]

Wow Mastan Khan. Fake encounter at Indian parliament? Nice conspiracy theory to go with my morning coffee.

This theory is right up along with the Kaal fellow. Bad influence

 

[Nihat]

Our Interests are paramount and since general elections are on and even otherwise summers are about to start i.e. even more infiltrators are expected to try to cross over the LoC , it would be foolish to move troops from the border.

If PA wished to move troops , it's free to do so , it's not like the IA has the enviable history of sneaking up on peaks on the other side in a clandestine manner.

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

Our Interests are paramount and since general elections are on and even otherwise summers are about to start i.e. even more infiltrators are expected to try to cross over the LoC , it would be foolish to move troops from the border.

If PA wished to move troops , it's free to do so , it's not like the IA has the enviable history of sneaking up on peaks on the other side in a clandestine manner.

Not entirely true. The operation Meghdoot to capture Siachen was a pre-emptive attack. However, Siachen was not demarcated so technically India did not violate the borders.
Pakistan however violated the LoC during kargil, which was a mutually agreed ceasefire line, so that's a clear breach of trust.

 

[Hellfire]

Some gesture is required from our side but looking at the infiltration attempts being made across LOC it will be difficult for the GOI to offer anything.

Plus being an election season with the model code of conduct and the country being run by bureaucrats at this moment, no policy decision is going to be made.

Not likely.

Remember 1997-98 period when militancy was lowest and the then Prime Minister of India Mr I.K. Gujral said that being a bigger nation we should take bigger & bolder steps and he reduced troop levels in Valley? That directly resulted in a flare up of militancy again in the state as adequate troops are to be maintained anyways.

Post Dec 13th attack on Indian Parliament, under pressure from US Prez Musharraf was forced to act and attach all such groups under direct PA observation and as a result of that, the level of infilteration has droppped down significantly. Added to that, the maintenance of adequate levels of force inspite of a drop has ensured relative calm in the valley after a real long time.

Now the PA itself is under strain and to avoid fighting two fronts ie Kashmiri militants and Taliban at same time, they may have to allow for laxer controls which may see higher incursions across LC. So question of withdrawl does not arise. No concessions should be granted whatsoever.

 

[Hellfire]

If PA wished to move troops , it's free to do so , it's not like the IA has the enviable history of sneaking up on peaks on the other side in a clandestine manner.

oh we have had plenty of them ..... successfully

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Absurd suggestion. The guy wants India to act directly against its own interests (esp. in light of massive infiltration in recent months ) so that Pakistan be persuaded to act in its own interests?

Complete Strawman.

This is why I specifically pointed out that militarily denuding the LoC was not what was being suggested, since infiltration would obviously be an issue on both sides, especially India.

A likely proposal would be the withdrawal on both sides of forces that could be utilized for offensive action across the LoC, which would not affect the IA's ability to interdict infiltrators.

In addition, '50 infiltrators' is not 'huge', as some here seem to be going into histrionics over, and the fact that barely 300 to 800 active insurgents remain in Kashmir is a strong testament to Pakistan's policy of restraint and preventing infiltrations since 2002.